Coping With Charters.

Savvy Leaders Can Work Productively With Charter School Advocates

Charter schools are coming, and pro-active school administrators are well advised to embrace them warmly.

Just because charter school advocates haven't approached your district yet does not mean you've been spared. Thirteen states, as of early summer, already have passed charter school laws and 20 others are considering such legislation this year. The Congress has authorized federal funds to be spent through state agencies to support the creation of charter schools. So far approximately 205 charter schools have come into existence (and a few others have come and gone).

The bulk of charter schools resides in California. By the end of the 1994-95 school year. California had 78 charters, more than a third of the country's total. California's law gives local school districts considerable authority over charter schools. That's also the case in Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Interestingly, Massachusetts, which grants charter schools the most autonomy, and New Mexico, which grants them the least, are the only two states where the state education agency is the sole sponsor of charters.

Sticking Points 

In its purest form, a charter school is independent of its sponsoring agency. In return for this freedom, charter schools are expected to be more accountable for higher student achievement than regular public schools.

Independence for charter schools can take several forms. Some state legislators exempt charter schools from state education codes. Other state laws say the charter schools can ignore district regulations.

Such independence, of course, can stick in the craw of some district administrators. And independence isn't the worst of it, in their view. Some state laws allow charter schools considerable say in deciding how much, if any, of their funding will be used to help their sponsoring districts with their operating costs.

Unfortunately, the needs of school districts generally are not a major consideration when legislators consider charter school legislation. Charter schools, after all, usually are sold on the basis of their independence from local district bureaucracies and restrictive state codes. Reform-minded legislators and governors argue that charters will improve public schools by giving teachers and parents the right to decide for themselves how best to raise student achievement.

Politicians also embrace charter school legislation because they view it as reform on the cheap. Nearly every state law says charters can achieve their lofty goals without additional local or state funds.

In other words, advocates say charter schools will increase achievement in exchange for freedom from rules and regulations; will offer parents another public school option; and will produce meaningful reform without costing the taxpayers a penny extra. No wonder charter schools are depicted as the perfect educational reform of the times.

Embracing Charters

Most states require charters to be sponsored by local school districts. As the sponsor, district administrators can influence significantly the charter schools success or contribute to its downfall. By being supportive, superintendents can shape their charter petitions and keep the resulting schools integrated into the districts overall reform efforts. Charter schools, in other words, can be as big a win for school administrators as they are for politicians and parents.

Savvy school administrators don't overlook the fact that charter schools tend to be limiting themselves one to a district. California, which has a law allowing as many as 10 charters in any one district, has seen only Los Angeles Unified, the nation's second-largest district, challenged by that number.

Unfortunately, some school administrators choose to give charters the cold shoulder. When the Southwest Regional Laboratory recently surveyed California's charter schools, many reported the district's central offices did not aggressively help them. Most districts publicly supported the charters but rarely provided hands-on assistance. In some cases, the districts were downright hostile. Not surprisingly, the hostility was related to the degree of independence the charters sought from the district.

School administrators who resist charter petitioners and then snub them after their school comes into being do so at their own peril. Charter supporters do not tend to suffer the district's scorn silently. Charter school advocates employ various tactics when faced with a hostile or indifferent district staff (see related story, page 22).

Nearly all school administrators want to be identified as reform-minded innovators. The most progressive will appreciate how difficult that goal is to achieve if they engage in a running battle with their charter schools.

Helpful Measures

Wise school administrators will embrace, at the very least applaud, those who want to organize a charter in their district. Our experience studying charters as they have evolved in California suggests a seven-step approach.

* No. 1: Incorporate charter schools into your overall reform strategy.

All good school administrators have a vision for their districts, a sense of what could be under certain circumstances. This vision generally is sold as part of a districtwide reform or improvement effort, If that's the case, charter schools should be recruited, incorporated, and supported as part of that vision, as one piece of a large school reform mosaic.

* No. 2: Be a charter school booster 

Surprise your critics by coming out publicly for charter schools. Talk them up at board meetings, in service club appearances, and in opinion pieces for the local newspaper. Express your eagerness to work with charter school advocates who want autonomy and are willing to ensure accountability in return. Do not hesitate to step forward and become a driving force behind a charter school. At the same time, you should stress that a school that avoids rules and regulations ought to be held to a higher standard than o her schools in the district.

* No. 3: Provide visibility and recognition for charter schools.

Once you have a charter school up and running, help focus public attention to it. Claim it as your own. When the school uses its independence to do something remark able, incorporate that practice in your other schools and give the charter school credit. Frankly, almost anything a charter can do independent of the district probably can be done by the district under a liberal interpretation of existing code and regulations.

* No. 4: Neutralize hostile allies.

The superintendent alone cannot ensure that the district is seen as supportive of a charter school. If the school board is hostile, for example, the public is going to perceive the district is unsupportive. School administrators will need to put some effort into the task of winning over the school board. At the very least, the board should have on record a policy that says it is supportive.

This policy is important because real hostility toward charter schools probably will come from central-office staff. These individuals will feel most threatened by the charter's s independence. A superintendent may find it helpful to have a supportive board policy on the books when confronting hostile central-office staff. One way of winning over your colleagues is by having the central-office staff draft the procedures the district should use to enhance the charter schools independence and monitor its accountability.

* No. 5: Make central-office staff available to the charter schools.

Central-office staff have one thing the charter school wants: expertise in legal, accounting, purchasing, and liability matters. Left to their own devices, some central-office staff will deny their expertise to charters. Even more likely, many charters will not realize the expertise they lack until they are in trouble. Supportive school administrators will ensure that the two parties get together early and often in a mutual win-win scenario. This togetherness ought to begin as soon as petitioners emerge in the community and start talking about what it would take to put together a charter petition. Common issues will arise as charter schools begin to consider what independence from the district is all about (see related story, page 23)

* No. 6: Establish a single point person as the contact for charter schools.

In a small or even a medium-size district, the superintendent may want to be the point person for the charter school. The idea is to select a responsible individual with the moxie to cut through the district's internal red tape to get things accomplished for the charter schools. By working through one person, charter schools are able to receive consistent messages and prompt turnaround for assistance. As important, one key individual within the district becomes knowledgeable about the charter school's needs and circumstances.

* No. 7: Take away the charter school's financial worries.

The Southwest Regional Laboratory study found that new charter schools have an immediate problem with finances. First, the petitioners frequently have little knowledge about how much money the charter should expect to receive from its sponsoring agency. When the school district is the sponsor, it ought to move quickly to inform everyone involved about the charter's funding level.

Second, the charter school has no idea how it should calculate or negotiate the district's share of its funding level. The district ought to be open about its costs and what the charter school--just as any other school--can expect in return from the district for these shared funds.

Third, many charter schools need help understanding the district's rationale for deciding how it establishes and administers the cycle for releasing funds to its schools. School administrators ought to review these decisions and ensure they are not impeding their charter schools. To the extent practical, districts ought to release funds to the charter schools in a manner that coincides with their planning and startup cycles.

Basic Reason

Keep in mind one overriding fact: Charter schools are being created to raise student achievement. The charters now operating are too new for anyone, friend or foe, to conclude whether they're accomplishing this goal. While patience is a virtue, school leaders need to be diligent in ensuring that any charter schools sponsored by the district deliver on this promise. If a charter school does not raise student achievement, the district should withdraw its sponsorship. That ought to be any school administrator's bottom-line position.

School administrators should not compromise two other principles. From the beginning of discussions with charter petitioners, superintendents ought to insist that any charter schools in their districts must manage their money prudently and obey the law. One Los Angeles school had its charter revoked by the school board because of fiscal improprieties. Another charter school in northern California was shut down and then reopened for a trial period because it had not complied with the state code, thus threatening more than $3 million the state owed to the districts.

All charter schools come into being to succeed, not fail. Savvy school administrators will do everything possible to ensure success for their charter schools. In the process, school districts can demonstrate their commitment to change, parents will have additional school choices, and school superintendents will be viewed as reform-minded educational leaders.

Joe Schneider is a senior associate executive director at AASA and former deputy executive director of the Southwest Regional Laboratory in Los Alamitos, Calif. Marcella Dianda is a senior researcher at the Southwest Regional Laboratory.

Ignoring Charter Schools May Be Perilous

Many school administrators would just as soon ignore charter schools, even those within their own districts. After all, a school administrator may conclude that if the charter schools want autonomy, they should make it on their own.

Big mistake!

Charter schools have ways to get the school administrator's attention, generally at the latter's peril. Charter schools in California are using the following tactics in their disputes with their local school districts:

* Seeking legal assistance.

* Contacting individual school board members, either directly or by copying them on correspondence to the district, to gather support.

* Contacting the state department of education for interpretations and advice.

* Using the news media to air gripes with the district.

* Enlisting the support of state legislators who passed the charter school laws.

* Marshaling the public outcry of parents whose children enrolled in the charter school.

* Threatening a negative campaign against a local bond issue if funds are not released to the charter school.

What You Must Consider First

As charter school advocates come forward, they need to come to grips with host of is issues. Supportive school administrators will want to help them identify such issues and formulate plans to address them.

Some significant issues include:

* How to develop a charter petition.

Every state with charter school legislation requires those who want a charter to file a petition. The petition requires the supporters to think through a variety of technical issues (e.g., how will you provide for the children's health and safety? What will be your admissions requirements? How will you measure student achievement? What qualifications will you establish for employment?).

* How to secure initial funding.

Arizona is the only state that provides charter schools with startup funds. The other states expect the charter schools to secure this funding from outside sources or to receive assistance from their sponsoring agency.

* How to run a school day by day.

Often charter schools are existing public schools that have converted. In other cases, the charter schools are brand-new entities. Most of these will need assistance in the business of running a school (e.g., financial accounting, contracting for services, establishing administrative structures, deciding on salary and benefit schedules, and hiring and firing).

* How to relate to employee unions.

In some states charter schools are required to adhere to locally bargained union contracts. Charter schools in other states are exempt from collective bargaining provisions and may choose to bargain for themselves. In both cases, charter schools need assistance in relating to employee unions.

* How to benefit from association with sponsoring agency.

Generally charter schools are sponsored by a local school district. In some cases, the charter schools will want to remain part of the district for such provisions as transportation, liability insurance, and purchasing. Charters frequently will need help in determining which services to retain and when to purchase them on their own.

* How to assess student achievement.

With few exceptions, charter schools are free to establish how they will measure student achievement. In fact, they are encouraged to develop or use alternative instruments, such as portfolio or performance assessments. Charter schools face two challenges. First, they will want to ensure that their achievement gains are gathered and displayed in ways that their various publics can understand. Second, they will want to avoid all the pitfalls associated with these new assessments, many of which puzzle even the nation's foremost measurement and evaluation experts.